Ross v Suncorp Metway Insurance Ltd [2002] QCA 93

Ross v Suncorp Metway Insurance Ltd [2002] QCA 93 (22 March 2002)

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

Ross v Suncorp Metway Insurance Ltd [2002] QCA 93

PARTIES:

ELIZABETH ROSS

(plaintiff/appellant)

v

TRISHA YOLANDA QUIRK

(first defendant)

SUNCORP METWAY INSURANCE LIMITED

ACN 075 695 966

(second defendant/respondent)

FILE NO/S:

Appeal No 5561 of 2001

DC No 1439 of 2000

DIVISION:

Court of Appeal

PROCEEDING:

General Civil Appeal

ORIGINATING COURT:

District Court at Brisbane

DELIVERED ON:

22 March 2002

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

11 February 2002

JUDGES:

Davies and Thomas JJA and Douglas J

Separate reasons for judgment of each member of the Court, each concurring as to the orders made

ORDER:

Appeal dismissed with costs

CATCHWORDS:

DAMAGES - MEASURE OF DAMAGES - PERSONAL INJURIES - LOSS OF EARNINGS AND EARNING CAPACITY - motor car accident - where appellant suffered neck and lower back injury - appellant qualified in Poland as a dental technician but had not worked in that capacity for 13 years preceding the accident - where nil assessment for past economic loss - where global assessment given for future economic loss - where trial judge acted on basis that appellant's condition would improve

APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL - PARTICULAR GROUNDS - EXCESSIVE OR INADEQUATE DAMAGES - GENERAL PRINCIPLES - DAMAGES INADEQUATE - whether trial judge erred in giving nil assessment for economic loss - application of principles in Malec v JC Hutton - where no error - whether trial judge erred in making

a global assessment - application of s 16 Supreme Court Act 1995 (Qld) - s 16 does not rule out the making of a global assessment - where global assessment appropriate

APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL - PARTICULAR GROUNDS - AWARD OF INTEREST ON DAMAGES - IN QUEENSLAND - where award of damages included interest - whether an additional sum for interest ought to have been given

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - COSTS - WHERE MONEY PAID INTO COURT OR OFFER OF COMPROMISE MADE - ORDER FOR COSTS ON INDEMNITY BASIS - whether trial judge erred in refusing to order costs on indemnity basis - where appellant made settlement offer before trial - where nature of case not clearly made out - where no error in refusing to award costs on indemnity basis

Supreme Court Act 1995 (Qld), s16

Uniform Civil Procedure Rules, Chapter 9 Part V

Elford v FAI [1994] 1 Qd R 258, considered

Hadzigeorgiou v O'Sullivan [1983] 1 Qd R 55, considered

Malec v J C Hutton Pty Ltd [1990] HCA 20; (1990) 169 CLR 638, applied

Powell v Black [1982] Qd R 801, 806, applied

Rogers v Brambles Australia Ltd [1998] 1 Qd R 212, considered

COUNSEL:

M Grant-Taylor SC for the appellant A M Daubney SC for the respondent

SOLICITORS:

McInnes Wilson for the appellant

Walsh Halligan Douglas for the respondent